Photos made with new Planar 50mm f1.4

[bleach551]

hello everyone,

Just wanted to post some made with the Planar 50mm f1.4. All shot at f!.4. Had to underexpose the rose to keep the reds from blooming. I love the 3d bokeh, sharpness and contrast.

[woodrim]

That appears to be a no excuses lens at fully open.

[bleach551]

woodrim,

If you can't get sharp focus wide open with this lens, the shooter must not be doing something right. Mine could be sharper but I shot the photos handheld. BTW, all photos taken with in-camera sharpness turned down to its lowest point.

[hexi]

Congrats on your first pix with the Planar.
Nice samples, wide open the lens is soft ! great for portraits.

Join our club anytime mister

[Arctures]

As I can see my AE version bokeh is different than MM version. It looks more creamy.

[AhamB]

[woodrim]

This is an expensive lens - I don't think anyone would argue with that. Most users of manual focus lenses do so because of the quality to cost ratio and resulting value. The Planar is most certainly a wonderful lens, but I wonder if its cost has crossed it over from that value consideration to one of being compared to more modern lenses for the same or less money. One that comes to mind is the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM. The images I've seen from it, shot at f/1.4, are quite spectacular.

[AhamB]

@Woodrim: The Sigma is definitely a sharp lens, wide-open and at close focus. I understood that stopped down and at longer focus distances it doesn't work so well as the Contax/Zeiss, which really shines for that use. The Sigma is better for portrait in general. Many people have reported inaccurate AF with the Sigma though.

[bleach551]

hello everyone,

Hexi,

Yes the Planar 50mm f1.4 is soft, but still looks great. The next photos I post will be in Planar Club, thanks for the invite!

Arctures,

I Didn't know if you meant Yours was more creamy or mine. If mine didn't
look as creamy as yours, it could be because I am using a"cropped sensor" camera, 7D, which only uses more of the center of the lens. This would not use the far edges of the borders which are softer and would contribute to the that "creamy" effect. It could also be because I used 1.8X Nd filtration(3 ND filters .03,.06,.09)


AhamB,

I said that the in-camera sharpening was set to the lowest setting, not that I didn't do any sharpening. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. I did add a slight bit of sharpening in the camera RAW program I have . I adjusted the Radius, Amount, and detail very slightly. You say that when you post a photo on the web that it should be sharpened, I disagree somewhat. If i am going to present an image as coming from a lens I should show what it will achieve without any"post processing". It would be like commenting on how great the contrast, micrcontrast and saturation are on the Planar 50mm f1.4 after altering the contrast, mids, and saturation in a photo processing program. I do have a Camera Raw program and "Photoshop CS5 v12.0 Extended" I use with photos I am presenting that are not expected to be the "true" rendition of the lens used. However, I didn't post these photos as the "Reference Standard" of the visual rendention of the Planar 50mm f1.4, but for people who won't use an camera raw program or photoshop to say, " this is what the Planar 50mm f1.4 will look like on your camera, with some allowances for internal settings, if you use the correct apeture, shutter speed and white balance. BTW, I use a "Lastolite" EZbalance %18 gray/white card for white balancing. The lowest setting that I have In my camera for RAW is SRAW, which is 2592X1728 and Sjpeg which is the same. I believe the maximum size for photos on this board is 1600X1280, I am still fairly new to this board, so if there is some place else here I could post those 2592X1728 Raw images please let me know. Otherwise, the only options I have in the camera raw progrom I am using is 1536X1020 .jpeg or .tif.

[AhamB]

[bleach551]

AhamB,

I understand what you are saying. but you are not understanding what I am saying. The image was sharpen. The sharpening that is applied in-camera, I have experienced, Is always inferior to what can be done in most of the top photo processing programs. I agree that a certain amount of in-camera sharpening is needed even to get the most out of an post-processing computer program. However, I chose to do very little processing because I felt that doing more would be presenting an image that was "untrue". Most people don't know how to adjust the in-camera sharpening to achieve maxium resolution in a post-processing program,like you or I would. So I chose to do very little in order to give a more realistic representation of what to expect. Besides would you have even known if I hadn't told you of the in-camera sharpening setting, I think not. The RAW photos, once selected, open up in the Canon Camera RAW program automatically without the need to be imported. Once I have process the RAW image to my liking, I chose a File format to save it in. There is just one level of compression not multiple ones and the only options are .jpeg, .psd, .PSD, .tif,.TIF. I didn't realize that my photos would be used to "Make or Break" someones buying decision. I believed that my photos were only one more representation of this particular lens from many others not the "final word". Maybe you should post some Planar 50mm f1.4 photos with the correct amount of sharpening to show once and for all the "the best"possible resolution that can be obtained for this lens.

Ever here of the expression "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth"

[fish4570]

I am not a Planar owner, nor a DSLR shooter, but I'm going to say howdy, bleach, because you are a semi-neighbor. I am in far western Jefferson County only a couple of hours east of Meridian. I do intend to have a Planar in M42 mount someday ...

[bleach551]

Fish4570,

Howdy neighbor, Glad to see another Southern Boy on this forum.I live in Lauderdale county. I had to wait a long time and save a good bit of money to get the one I have now but it was worth it. I hope you can get one in the M42 mount soon. Good luck